Constellation Energy vs Vistra
CEG and VST side by side, both in electric services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CEG and VST compare
Constellation Energy is the larger company, worth 2.0 times as much as Vistra ($93.0B against $46.4B).
On earnings, Vistra is cheaper: it trades at 23.4× trailing earnings, against 25.6× for Constellation Energy.
Constellation Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (26.0% versus 3.8% for Vistra).
Vistra keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.6% compared with 11.1% at Constellation Energy.
Both pay dividends: Constellation Energy yields 0.64% and Vistra 0.66%.
Vistra scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 11 for Constellation Energy), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CEG | VST |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $93.0B | $46.4B |
| Share price | $262.38 | $138.37 |
| Change, 1 year | −34.6% | −30.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 598% | 575% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.21 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 15K | 6,390 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.6× | 23.4× (better) |
| P/S | 3.0× | 2.4× (better) |
| P/B | 2.9× (better) | 8.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.2× | 12.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | 301× | 20.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 0.33% | 4.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $257.08 | $139.28 |
| Margin of safety | −2.1% | 0.65% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 26.0% (better) | 3.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 9.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 15.2% (better) | −7.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 6.9% (better) | −5.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 10.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 14.7% | 18.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.1% | 11.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 0.99% | 11.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | 15.3% | 43.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 8.2% | 12.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.77 (better) | 3.57 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.90 (better) | 3.54 |
| Interest coverage | 5.9× (better) | 3.1× |
| Current ratio | 1.46 (better) | 0.97 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.50 | 1.51 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.64% | 0.66% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 15.9% | 13.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 3 | 3 |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.64% | 3.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 81.3% | 84.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.28% | 6.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $418K (better) | −$51.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.4% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- CEG stock overview
- CEG income statement
- CEG valuation and score
- VST stock overview
- VST income statement
- VST valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.